A Nigerian manufacturing company, Rite Foods Ltd, has slammed a N1.60 billion suit against a Kano-based Lebanese company, Mamuda Beverages Nigeria Ltd, for allegedly imitating one of its products, Fearless energy drink.
In the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/705/2025 now before A Federal High Court in Abuja, Rite Foods claimed that Mamuda Beverageswas imitating its Fearless energy drink by producing a similar product it called Pop Power energy drink.
Rite Foods accused Mamuda Beverages of trademark infringement and pass off, noting that contrary to the practice where other players in the industry product distinct products, Mamuda Beverages’ Pop Power is made similar to its Fearless.
It stated in a statement of claim that “the defendant’s pop power energy drink has been designed in a black/ brown bottle with a yellow cover to pass off as the plaintiff’s product in the market.
“The design of the defendant’s Pop Power energy drink is too identical to the registered design of the plaintiff’s fearless energy drink not to pass off as the plaintiff’s product in a smaller size.
“The similarity between both designs is likely to cause confusion amongst consumers of the plaintiff’s product, especially in a market where the plaintiff maintains the sole and distinctive design of such nature.
“The marks contained in the label for the defendant’s pop power energy drink are also very similar/identical to the registered trademark in the plaintiff’s label for the fearless energy drinks.
“The similarity is such that it is likely to confuse and deceive consumers of the plaintiff’s product into thinking the defendant’s Pop Power energy is a smaller-sized product from the plaintiff.
“The defendant’s Pop Power energy drink directly imitates the appearance of the plaintiff’s Fearless energy drink product, such that it is highly probable that consumers would mistake the defendant’s product for the plaintiff’s Fearless energy drink product.”
Rite Foods claimed that Mamuda Beverages had earlier engaged in similar pass off and imitation, leading to a legal dispute, which was later settled out of count at the instance of Mamuda, leading to a consent judgment endorsed on March 3, by Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja.
The plaintiff said the consent judgment contained conditions intended that the defendant (Mamuda) would redesign its energy drink product in such a way as to distinguish it from that of the plaintiff (Rite Foods).
Rite Foods stated that it was surprised to learn that a few weeks after the consent judgment, Mamuda Beverages commenced production and distribution of what it termed a “remake” or “remodel” of its Pop Power energy drinks.
It added that upon an examination of the purported ‘remake’ or ‘remodel’ Pop Power energy drink, it found that the new product was substantially the same as the earlier infringing product, which was the subject of the earlier suit
Rite Foods said the latest development informed the fresh suit it filed, which is now pending before Justice Emeka Nwite and in which it is seeking a number of reliefs.
It wants an order of perpetual injunction restraining Mamuda Beverages, its directors, distributors or any other person(s) from infringing its registered trademark by engaging in the trade or business of manufacturing, supplying, distributing or selling the drinks in Nigeria,
The plaintiff also made an order for the delivery up for destruction of the offending Pop Power energy drink products and all other products held to be infringing its registered design and trademark, in the possession, custody and/ or control of the defendant.
It is seeking “general damages in the sum of N1 billion for the injury suffered by the plaintiff as a result of the infringement and unlawful use of the plaintiff’s registered design and trademark by the defendant.
Rite Foods also wants the court to order the defendant to pay it N60 million as the cost of prosecuting the suit.
Mamuda Beverages has, however, denied any wrongdoing, claiming, in its response, that the new suit constitutes an abuse of the process of the court.
It further claimed that issues being raised in the new suit had been effectively dealt with in the previous case marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/139/2025 that ended in the consent judgment.
Mamuda Beverages said part of the conditions in the consent judgment were that effects modifications to the product design of its Pop Power energy drink before resuming production and sale, which it claimed to have complied with.
It argued that the court is functus officio in respect of the subject of the fresh suit, adding that the court lacks the jurisdiction to adjudicate the complaints of the plaintiff in this suit.
Justice Nwite has, however, fixed May 28 for the hearing of the preliminary objection filed by Mamuda Beverages.
